2 things here. why yo never give up, why the death penalty is wrong.

[thedunhill225]

Listen, there is more to this case than this article... There is the finger prints of a man who committed an identical murder at the scene, there is reasons why testimony was accepted, why a deal was offered, etc... But just read this part....

http://mobile.france24.com/en/201110...oxing-debut-52

Dreams may take a long time to come true but if you never give up they can. The man has no pro ambitions, no anger, no trying to get time back..... He wanted ONE FIGHT....to live his dream for ONE NIGHT!

He did.

[mark!]

I saw this story during the ESPY awards, it's the most amazing thing I've ever seen. This guy has NO hate, no anger, or anything negative towards anyone. He's making up for lost time without wasting time being angry and upset about the past. I applaud him and his ability to make the most of the situation. I'm glad he got his fight, and glad he won it.

[steel1970]

That's a great story, but personally I would not abolish the death penalty over this. What exactly does the death penalty hafta do with this story? If your inference is the mistake that was made, we have come a long way since 1983, and the evidence presented in ghis day and age is more times than not, correct....

[Jared Ragsdale]

That's a great story, but personally I would not abolish the death penalty over this. What exactly does the death penalty hafta do with this story? If your inference is the mistake that was made, we have come a long way since 1983, and the evidence presented in ghis day and age is more times than not, correct....

I don't have time to read the story right now.. but my views on the death penalty were just changed recently. Not for the bleeding heart liberal reasons - but because of the fallibility of our legal system.

The amount of people that have been convicted of murder and then found innocent 20+ years later is ridiculous - and I am sure many, many more innocent men have died due to the death penalty without being found guilty first.

Do I think the death penalty should be completely abolished? No, not really. I think in cases where they actually have to collect evidence and make a case against a man - that we need to be more careful. Ya know if a guy walks into a salon and kills 8 people (like the latest news story), surrenders afterward.. etc. It is obvious he did the deed - multiple witnesses, confession, etc. Kill him.

A man that is convicted of killing his wife due to evidence that has been found in the house that could have been planted or misunderstood - should not be put to death. No witnesses, no confession, just a case made against him due to some evidence collected. I think you get my gist.

[lhart6272]

I don't have time to read the story right now.. but my views on the death penalty were just changed recently. Not for the bleeding heart liberal reasons - but because of the fallibility of our legal system.

The amount of people that have been convicted of murder and then found innocent 20+ years later is ridiculous - and I am sure many, many more innocent men have died due to the death penalty without being found guilty first.

Do I think the death penalty should be completely abolished? No, not really. I think in cases where they actually have to collect evidence and make a case against a man - that we need to be more careful. Ya know if a guy walks into a salon and kills 8 people (like the latest news story), surrenders afterward.. etc. It is obvious he did the deed - multiple witnesses, confession, etc. Kill him.




A man that is convicted of killing his wife due to evidence that has been found in the house that could have been planted or misunderstood - should not be put to death. No witnesses, no confession, just a case made against him due to some evidence collected. I think you get my gist.

x2

[teckno05]

I don't have time to read the story right now.. but my views on the death penalty were just changed recently. Not for the bleeding heart liberal reasons - but because of the fallibility of our legal system.

The amount of people that have been convicted of murder and then found innocent 20+ years later is ridiculous - and I am sure many, many more innocent men have died due to the death penalty without being found guilty first.

Do I think the death penalty should be completely abolished? No, not really. I think in cases where they actually have to collect evidence and make a case against a man - that we need to be more careful. Ya know if a guy walks into a salon and kills 8 people (like the latest news story), surrenders afterward.. etc. It is obvious he did the deed - multiple witnesses, confession, etc. Kill him.

A man that is convicted of killing his wife due to evidence that has been found in the house that could have been planted or misunderstood - should not be put to death. No witnesses, no confession, just a case made against him due to some evidence collected. I think you get my gist.

x3, especially on fallibility of legal system

[bigoso]

I don't have time to read the story right now.. but my views on the death penalty were just changed recently. Not for the bleeding heart liberal reasons - but because of the fallibility of our legal system.

The amount of people that have been convicted of murder and then found innocent 20+ years later is ridiculous - and I am sure many, many more innocent men have died due to the death penalty without being found guilty first.

Do I think the death penalty should be completely abolished? No, not really. I think in cases where they actually have to collect evidence and make a case against a man - that we need to be more careful. Ya know if a guy walks into a salon and kills 8 people (like the latest news story), surrenders afterward.. etc. It is obvious he did the deed - multiple witnesses, confession, etc. Kill him.

A man that is convicted of killing his wife due to evidence that has been found in the house that could have been planted or misunderstood - should not be put to death. No witnesses, no confession, just a case made against him due to some evidence collected. I think you get my gist.

QFT......I agree withe "principle" of the death penalty but the fallibility of the legal system + I don't believe the death penalty is issued fairly makes it hard for me to support it in it's current state. I'm here in ga so this has been a hot topic lately because of the Troy Davis situation. Here we have a guy put to death based on witness testimony and 8/10 jurors recanted their testimony..... And he was still put to death!!!!! They actually had a group on the radio called " death row survivors" or something like that. 130+ guys that were on death row but were later exonerated.... How scary is that?

[thedunhill225]

That's a great story, but personally I would not abolish the death penalty over this. What exactly does the death penalty hafta do with this story? If your inference is the mistake that was made, we have come a long way since 1983, and the evidence presented in ghis day and age is more times than not, correct....

I am sure you are rt when you say "more often than not..." But is that enough for you??

This post wasn't just about the death penalty or people convicted of murder but also about the human spirit and a man dream becoming a reality.

[steel1970]

No, I understand that there are many issues with the legal system. I just feel that NOW, we have damn near foolproof ways of getting proper convictions. Most of the stories you hear about wrongful convictions being overturned are happening in part due to DNA testing. If DNA is good enough to exonerate people imprisoned in a time when the testing wasn't available, in my opinion it's good enough to convict. I also feel that if there is the classic "open and shut" case, and it's proven beyond a doubt with DNA and other avenues, the punishment should be swift and not cost the taxpayers money for 20 years thru the appeal process. I understand this will cause mixed responses, so I will say ghat this is merely my opinion.....

[Jared Ragsdale]

No, I understand that there are many issues with the legal system. I just feel that NOW, we have damn near foolproof ways of getting proper convictions. Most of the stories you hear about wrongful convictions being overturned are happening in part due to DNA testing. If DNA is good enough to exonerate people imprisoned in a time when the testing wasn't available, in my opinion it's good enough to convict. I also feel that if there is the classic "open and shut" case, and it's proven beyond a doubt with DNA and other avenues, the punishment should be swift and not cost the taxpayers money for 20 years thru the appeal process. I understand this will cause mixed responses, so I will say ghat this is merely my opinion.....

I would tend to agree. If it is obvious that a man killed someone else - irrefutable evidence like it was caught on camera in HD or something.. go out and hang him.. I don't really care about that.

In cases where it is not 100% certain and there is a strong case for the defense, I don't think death is a suitable option.

[steel1970]

I would tend to agree. If it is obvious that a man killed someone else - irrefutable evidence like it was caught on camera in HD or something.. go out and hang him.. I don't really care about that.

In cases where it is not 100% certain and there is a strong case for the defense, I don't think death is a suitable option.

I agree here, absolutely. I think my biggest beef with our justice system is the soft penalties for crimes against children. IMO, if you hurt or do something of a sexual nature with a child, and again, there would need to be irrefutable evidence, I think the punishment should be swift and SEVERE....there have been many horrific crimes against children where the offender should be put to death, but they get 5 years....it sickens me. This country has made it's death penalty a joke. In other less civilized countries, the death penalty actually serves as a deterrent for crime IMO....here, not at all, except maybe in Texas....lol

[Doberman]

I agree here, absolutely. I think my biggest beef with our justice system is the soft penalties for crimes against children. IMO, if you hurt or do something of a sexual nature with a child, and again, there would need to be irrefutable evidence, I think the punishment should be swift and SEVERE....there have been many horrific crimes against children where the offender should be put to death, but they get 5 years....it sickens me. This country has made it's death penalty a joke. In other less civilized countries, the death penalty actually serves as a deterrent for crime IMO....here, not at all, except maybe in Texas....lol

Texas has an express lane.

[lhart6272]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Zain


this dude was a real winner from my state

[bigoso]

I agree here, absolutely. I think my biggest beef with our justice system is the soft penalties for crimes against children. IMO, if you hurt or do something of a sexual nature with a child, and again, there would need to be irrefutable evidence, I think the punishment should be swift and SEVERE....there have been many horrific crimes against children where the offender should be put to death, but they get 5 years....it sickens me. This country has made it's death penalty a joke. In other less civilized countries, the death penalty actually serves as a deterrent for crime IMO....here, not at all, except maybe in Texas....lol

the sad fact is that in this country it seems the mostly severely punished timewise are drug offenders

[slide]

Yeah...I dont think my views on the death penalty are going to change.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/nation...R2L_story.html

-slide